HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/15/1984Wednesday, August 15, 1984
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, met in Regular Session at the County
Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida,
on Wednesday, August 15, 1984, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present
were Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Patrick B. Lyons, Vice
Chairman; Margaret C. Bowman; -and William C. Wodtke, Jr.
Absent were Richard N. Bird and County Attorney Gary
Brandenburg, who were out of town on County business. Also
present were Michael J. Wright, County Administrator; Chris
Paull, Assistant Attorney to the Board of County Commis-
sioners; Jeffrey K. Barton, OMB Director; and Virginia
Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order.
Pastor. Stan Sanford, First Baptist Church, Wabasso,
gave the invocation, and Commissioner Bowman led the Pledge
of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
Administrator Wright requested that an item be added
under the Administrator's matters in regard to emergency
replacement of a radio repeater on the Hobart Tower.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, (Commissioner Bird
being absent) the Board unanimously (4-0)
added the above emergency item to today's agenda
as requested by the Administrator.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
July 25, 1984. There were none.
AUG 15 1984 - Mr;K 58 WE 0
AUG 15 1994 BOOK 58 P,, iu 02
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, Commissioner Bird
being absent, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting
of July 25, 1984, as written.
CONSENT AGENDA
Chairman Scurlock requested that Item D be removed from
the Consent Agenda for discussion.
�A. Approve Appointment of Deputy Sheriff
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
(4-0) approved the appointment of Deputy
Sheriff William B. Hunter by Sheriff Dobeck.
B. Lease for Credit Union
The Board reviewed staff memo, as follows:
2
TO: THE HONORABLE MEMBERS DATE: August 6, 1984 FILE:
OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: Michael Wright SUBJECT: County Administrator New Lease for
Credit Union
FROM: H. T. "Sobui
wlDean REFERENCES:
General Services Director
On July 31, 1984 I asked the County Attorney to prepare the
subject lease. This is for the space that the Credit Union now
occupies which Building and Grounds Personnel recently
renovated.
I have discussed this item with Lynn Williams, Building and
Grounds Superintendent, and this was the tenative agreement prior
to the move.
I respectfully request the Board of County Commissioners to
authorize the Chairman to execute this Lease Agreement.
l •0,5
L-
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
(4-0) approved the lease with Indian River
Federal Credit Union.
3
BOOK 58 FA.GE 03
AUG 15 1994
LEASE AGREEMENT
BOOK 58 pmu 04
THIS LEASE AGREEMENT, entered into this 14th day of
June, 1984 AD., between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, hereinafter called
the "LESSOR", and Indian River Federal Credit Union hereinafter
called the "LESSEE."
W I T N E S S E T H:
That the Lessor,•for and in consideration of the cov-
enants and agreements hereinafter mentioned to be kept and
performed by the Lessee, has demised and leased to the Lessee, for
the term and under the conditions hereinafter set out, those
certain premises in Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida,
described as follows:
Suite Number 114 located in the Indian River
County Administration Building at:
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
which shall constitute an aggregate area of 700 square feet of
rentable space, at the rate of $10.55 per square foot per year.
I. TERM
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above described premises for a
term of two years commencing on the 14th day of June, 1984 and
pursuant to the terms of Covenant No. 1 attached hereto.
II. RENTALS
The Lessor hereby leases to the Lessee and the Lessee
hereby leases from the Lessor the above described premises for the
term set out in this Lease and the Lessee agrees to pay to the
Lessor the sum of SIX HUNDRED FIFTEEN AND 42/100 DOLLARS per month
for the rental period described in Article I of this Lease. The
rent for any fractional part of the first month shall be prorated.
The monthly rent shall be payable in advance with first rental
installment due on day of occupancy. Lessor acknowledges receipt
of $615.42 at the execution of this Lease. The rentals shall be
paid to the Lessor at:
1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960
III. HEATING, AIR CONDITIONING AND JANITOR SERVICES
1. a. The Lessor agrees to furnish to the Lessee heating
and air conditioning and maintain same in satisfactory operating
condition at all times for the leased premises during the term of
the Lease at the expense of the Lessor.
1. b. The Lessor agrees to maintain thermostats in the
demised premises at 65 degrees fahrenheit during the heating
season and 78 degrees fahrenheit during the cooling season.
2. The Lessor
necessary janitorial
term of the Lease.
agrees to furnish janitorial services and all
supplies for the leased premises during the
r
IV. LIGHT FIXTURES
The Lessor agrees to provide in the demised premises minimum
light fixtures for the use of the Lessee. The Lessor shall be
responsible for the replacement of all bulbs, lamps, tubes, and
starters used in such fixtures for the -purpose of furnishing
light.
V. MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS
1. The Lessor shall provide for interior maintenance and
repairs in accordance with generally accepted good practices,
including repainting, the replacement of worn'or damaged floor
covering and repairs or replacement of interior equipment as may
be necessary due to normal usage. The Lessee shall, during the
term of this Lease, keep the interior of the demised premises in
as good a state of repair as it is at the time of the commencement
of this Lease, reasonable wear and tear and unavoidable casualties
excepted.
2. The Lessor shall maintain and keep in good repair the
exterior of the demised premises during the term of this Lease.
Lessee shall be responsible for the replacement of all windows
broken or damaged in the demised premises.
3. The Lessor agrees to furnish pest control services for
the leased remises during the term of the Lease.
VI. UTILITIES
That the Lessor will promptly pay all gas, water, trash,
power and electric light rates or charges which may become payable
during the term of this Lease for the leased premises.
VII. ALTERATIONS
1. The Lessee shall have the right to make any alterations
in and to the demised premises during the term of this Lease upon
first having obtained the written consent thereto of the Lessor.
The Lessor shall not capriciously withhold the consent for any
such alterations.
VIII. INJURY OR DAMAGE TO PROPERTY ON THE PREMISES
That all property of any kind that may be on the premises
during the continuancy of this Lease shall be at the sole risk of
the Lessee, and except for any negligence of the Lessor, the
Lessor shall not be liable to the Lessee or any other person for
any injury, loss or damage to property or to any person on the
premises.
IX. FIRE AND OTHER HAZARDS
In the event that the demised premises, or the major part
thereof, are destroyed by fire, lightning, storm or other casual-
ty, the Lessor, at its option, may forthwith repair the damage to
such demised premises at its own cost and expense. The rental
thereon shall cease until the completion of such repairs and the
Lessor will immediately refund the pro rata part of any rental
paid in advance by the Lessee prior to such destruction; should
the premises be only partly destroyed, so that the major part
thereof is unusable by the Lessee, then the rental shall abate to
the extent that the injured or damaged part bears to the whole of
such premises and such injury or damage shall b restored by the
Lessor as speedily as is practicable and upon the completion of
such repairs, the full rental shall commence and the Lease shall
then continue the balance of the term.
AUG 15 1984
-2-
BOOK 58 ` 05
Fr
X. EXPIRATION OF TERM
BOOK�;F�1;E
At the expiration of the term, the Lessee will peaceably
yield up to the Lessor the demised premises in good and tenantable
repair. It is understood and agreed between the parties that the
Lessee shall have the right to remove from the premises all
personal property of the Lessee installed on the premises by it,
provided the Lessee restores the premises to as good a state of
repair as they were prior to the removal.
XI. SUBLETTING AND ASSIGNMENT
This Lease may not be assigned or sublet without the consent
of Lessor, which consent may be withheld.
XII. WAIVER OF DEFAULTS
The waiver by Lessor of any breach of this Lease by the
Lessee shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach
of any duty or covenant imposed by this Lease.
XIII. RIGHT OF LESSOR TO INSPECT
The Lessor, at all reasonable times, may enter into and upon
the demised premises for the purpose of viewing the same and for
the purpose of making any such repairs as they are required to
make under the terms of this Lease.
XIV. BREACH OF COVENANT
These presents are upon this condition, that, except as
provided in the Lease, if the Lessee shall neglect or fail to
perform or observe any covenant herein contained, which on the
Lessee's part is to be performed, and such default shall continue
for a period of thirty (30) days after receipt of written notice
thereof, Lessor may enter upon the premises and reposses the same
as of their former estate and expel the Lessee and remove its
effects forcefully, if necessary, without being taken or deemed to
be guilty of any manner of trespass and thereupon this demise
shall terminate but without prejudice to any remedy which might
otherwise be used by the Lessor for arrears of rent or for any
breach of the Lessee's covenants herein contained.
XV. USE OF PREMISES
The Lessee will not make or suffer any lawful, improper or
offensive use of the premises or any use or occupancy thereof
contrary to the laws of the State of Florida or to such Ordinances
of the city and/or county in which the demised premises are locat-
ed, now or hereinafter made, as may be applicable to the Lessee.
XVI. RENEWAL
The Lessee is hereby granted the option to renew this
Lease for an additional two years upon the same terms and
conditions except rent shall be renegotiated. If the Lessee
desires to renew this Lease under the provisions of the Article it
shall give the Lessor written notice thereof not more than six (6)
months nor less than 45 days prior to the expiration of the term
provided in Article I of this Lease.
XVII. NOTICES AND INVOICES
All notices required to be served upon the Lessor shall be
served by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested,
at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, 32960, and all notices
required to be served upon the Lessee by registered or certified
mail, return receipt requested at the address of the Lessee at
1840 25th Street, Suite N-114, Vero Beach, Florida, 32960.
-3-
_I
Lease payment shall be submitted monthly to Indian River County
Finance Department, Suite 201, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach,
Florida 32960.
XVIII. ADDITIONAL TERMS
Any and all additional
covenants and conditions appear in the attached.
No additional covenants or
conditions form a part of this Lease.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto executed this
instrument for the purposes herein expressed, the day and year
above written.
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the presence of:
As to Lessee
APPROVE S TO FORM AND
LEGAL U IC ENCY-
W-TTOIMEY Ll
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
DON C. SCURL R, JR, Ch an.
Attest:Jfi-p � (p
FREDA WRIGHT, C� erk
INDIAN RIVER FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
COVENANT NUMBER I
IOWA
TEN AND FIFTY-FIVE ONE HUNDREDTHS DOLLARS per square foot
per year for the first year, June 14, 1984 to and including
June 14, 1985 for a monthly rental payment of SIX HUNDRED FIFTEEN
AND FORTY-TWO/100.
TEN AND FIFTY-FIVE ONE HUNDREDTHS DOLLARS per square foot
for the second year, June 14, 1985 to and including June 14, 1986,
for a monthly rental payment of SIX HUNDRED FIFTEEN AND
FORTY-TWO/100.
LESSO
APPRO
LEGAL
FORM AND
Ado ted: Augast-15, 1984
AUG 15 N4 . -12-
BOOK e 8 F°GF 07
AUG 15 1984Boa 58 F-,�cF 0
C. Resolution - Per Diem for Property Appraisal Adjustment
Board Members
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
(4-0) adopted Resolution 84-56 providing for the
allowance of per diem compensation for Property
Appraisal Adjustment Board members.
RESOLUTION NO. 84- 56
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR
STATUTORY PER DIEM COMPENSATION FOR 1984 PROPERTY
APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD MEMBERS
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting of August 1, 1984,
the Board of County Commissioners appointed Chairman Don C.
Scurlock, Jr., Vice Chairman Patrick B. Lyons, and Commissioner
Richard N. Bird to serve as the County Commission's delegates to
the Property Appraisal Adjustment Board for the 1984 hearings;
and
WHEREAS, The School Board of Indian River County
adopted Resolution No. 85-2 on July 27, 1984, appointing their
membership to the -Board and providing for allowance of per diem
compensation for such members in accordance with Florida Statutes
§194.015 (1983); and
WHEREAS, the cited statute requires a specific
election from both the County Commission and The School Board in
order to allow such compensation.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS that:
1. The foregoing recitals, including the appointments
to this year's PAAB by the County Commission, are hereby ratified
and acknowledged; and
2. The above-named members of the 1984 Property
Appraisal Adjustment Board, or their duly authorized replacements,
F.]
may receive per diem compensation for service provided on the
Board, as allowed by law for State employees, pursuant to the
above-cited statute.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Wodtke who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Lyons and, upon being put to a vote, the
vote was as follows:
Chairman Don
C. Scurlock, Jr.
Ave
Vice -Chairman Patrick B.
Lyons
Aye
Commissioner
Richard N.
Bird
Absent
Commissioner
Margaret C.
Bowman
Aye
Commissioner
William C.
Wodtke, Jr.
Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and
adopted this 15th day of August , 1984.
'f
Attest: t' Mi_
FREDA WRIGHT
Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By -- C
DON C. SCURL CR, JR.
Chairman
E. Change Order #1 - Contract #3 - Water Distribution System
h
of Route 60
The Board reviewed memo of the Assistant Utility
Director, as follows:
V7
BOOK 8 P-,
AUG 15 1984
BOOK 5-8 P�{;E 10
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 8, 1984 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
THRU : Terrance G. Pinto�� SUBJECT:
Utility Service Director
CHANGE ORDER #1 ON CONTRACT #3
FOR THE WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
OF ROUTE 60
(0
FROM: Joseph A. Baird REFERENCES: A) Masteller Letter 7/31/84
Assistant Utility Director B) Contract Change Order
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Boyce Company, Contractor for both Contracts #2 and #3 of the
Route 60 water distribution system, bid the unit material cost of
1211, 8" and 6" pipe at a lower price in Contract #2 than in Contract _
#3. It has been requested and agreed upon by Boyce Company that
they lower the unit material cost in Contract #3 to the amount that
was bid in Contract #2. This will mean an overall decrease in
Contract #3 of the Route 60 water line in the amount of $1,658.25.
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Honorable Members of the Board of County Commissioners
approve Change Order #1 of Contract #3 which will mean a $1,658.25
decrease in the contract.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
(4-0) approved Change Order #1 (Contract #3)
SR 60 Water Distribution System.
10
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURL FORM APPROVED OMB No. 0575-0042
Form FmHA 424-7 FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION ORDER NO.
( Rev. 6-11-80)
1 (Contract #3)
('ONTRACT CHANGE ORDER DATE
July 23, 1984
STATE
Florida
CONTRACT FOR COUNTY
Indian Riven County Water Project U84-1 — Contract #3 Indian River
OWNER
Indian River County
To ..... B.4y.c.1�..Company ....................__............................... - .......... -
(Contractor)
You are hereby requested to comply with the following changes from the contract plans and specifications:
Description of Changes DECREASE INCREASE
(Supplemental Plans and Specifications Attached) in Contract Price in Contract Price
Item Description Change $ $
4 12" Water Main $46.00 to $23.20/L.F. $912.00
5 8" Water Main $33.60 to $18.70/1,-F, 372.50
6 6" Water Main $31.40 to $16.45/L.F. 373.75
TOTALS 1 $ 16.58..25.......
ANGE IN CONTRACT
JUSTIFICATION:•
Boyce Company has both Contracts #2 and #3 on this project and has agreed to con—
struct Items 4, 5, & 6 for same unit price on both Contracts. This results in the
noted reduction of unit prices for Contract #3.
The amount of the Contract will be (Decreased) (1?orcox9ttd By The Sum Of: One Thousand, Six Hundred
Fifty—Eight and 25/100------------------------------------ Dollars($ 1,658.25
TNe Contract Total Including this and previous Change Orders Will Be: Six Hundred Ninety—One Thousand,
ISAn, Hundred Forty—Six and 75/100 -------------------- ZZZ:Dollars ($ 691,746.75 ).
B1
C
_P Contract Period Provided for Completion Will Be KX&XXM) (DkX&X (Unchanged): 180 Calendar Days
m` �T is document wildbecome a suppleme t to the contract nd alt provisions will apply hereto.
d(J\
�Rtr_�qsted ^-�`— August 15, 1984
a
(Owner)
(Owner's Grche/Eng
m4wited .C.O-�t�c�
(Contractor)
Approved By FmHA
(Name and Title)
(Date)
_July 24, 1984
(D a te)
(Date)
(Date)
This Information will be used as record of any Number copies required: 4No further monies or other benefits may be paid out under this
Changes to the original construction contract. Time to complete: 30 min. program unless this report Is completed and filed as required by
existing taw and regulations (7 C.F.R. Part 1924).
^ U.S.GPO:1981-0-564.009/ 1570 i' n t)
11
AUG 15 1984
FmHA 424-7 (Rev. 6-11-80)
BOOK 58 FADE 11
AUG 15 194
BOOK 58 ;'nLIE 1
D. Change Order 1 (Contract #1) - Elev. Storage Tank - SR 60
The Board reviewed memo of the Utilities Service
Director, as follows:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 8, 1984 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
THRU.: Micha .W ight SUBJECT: CHANGE ORDER 1 ON CONTRACT #1
Coun y inistrator FOR ELEVATED STORAGE TANK ON
ROUTE 60 (PROJECT U84)
FROM: Terrance G. PinREFERENCES:
Utility Service Di ector
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
A)
Masteller Letter
7/12/84
B)
Caldwell Letter
7/19/84
C)
Masteller Letter
8/01/84
D)
Contract Change
Order
A full time structural engineer inspector will no longer be required
due to a recent amendment to the law which removes the water tank
from the threshold category. Under the amended law, we are able to
utilize our consulting engineer for the project as inspectors of
the water tank; therefore, we will not be required to hire an
additional structural engineer inspector.
ALTERNATIVE AND ANALYSES:
1. A full time structural engineer inspector on the project.
2. A part-time structural engineer inspector on the project which
will offer a $13,800.00 deduction.
3. Completely eliminate the requirement for a full time structural
engineer inspector which will offer a deduction of $19,200.00.
Chairman Scurlock just wished to be assured that the
water tank can be constructed to meet all standards without
- the supervision of a structural engineer.
Administrator Wright noted that the tank is designed by
structural engineers, and Attorney Paull pointed out that
the end result still has to meet the same standards and an
engineer has to sign off on it.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
(4-0) approved Change Order #1 (Contract #1)
re the elevated storage tank on Route 60.
12
The amount of the Contract will be (Decreased) (%n`EI(MN& By The Sum Of: Nineteen Thousand Two Hundred
and 00/100---------------------------------------- -Dollars($-19,200.00 )
The Contract Total Including this and previous Change Orders Will Be: Seven Hundred twenty-eight thou-
sand. five hundred and 00/100--------------------- `Dollars($ 728,500.00
The Contract Period Provided for Completion Will Be (IIC(DldE7f (Unchanged): _'4FO Cal PnAar Days
This document *11 become a supplement to the contract and all provisions will apply hereto.
Requested ' C- August 15, 1984
Recommended
Accepted ^ �V• Wed v
(Owner)
(Owner's Architect/Engineer)
tractor)
Approved By FmHA
(Name and Title)
(Date)
July 24, 1984
(Date)
Julv 30, 1984
(D ate)
(Date)
This Information will be used as record of any Number copies required: 4 No further monies or other benefits may be paid out under this
changes to the original construction contract. program unless this report is completed and filed as required by
Time to complete: 30 min. existing law and regulations (7 C.F.R. Part 1924).
*U.S.GPO:1981-0-584-0091157n �� FmNA d7d_7 (R.- r t i on%
AUG 15 1984
Position 6 - • • ""�
13
BooK 58 PAGE 13
F
f UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Form FmHA 424-7
FORM APPROVED OMB No. 0575-0042
I FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION
(Rev. 6-11-80)
ORDER NO.
1 Contract #1)
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER
DATE
July 23, 1984
STATE
Florida
CONTRACT FOR
COUNTY
Indian River Water Project U84-1 - Contract #1
Indian River
OWNER
Indian River County
To._...._..Caldsatell...Tanks,._Inc._._--•-----_.....--.-•--...-. -----_-----------•-------•--------•-•--______---------______...____..__---------------
(Contractor)
You are hereby requested to comply with the following changes from the contract plans and specifications:
Description of Changes
DECREASE
INCREASE
(Supplemental Plans and Specifications Attached)
in Contract Price
in Contract Price
Refer to Specifications 2.3-1., paragraph en-
$
titled, "Structional Inspection", and delete
the paragraph except for the last sentence.
'
Completely eliminate the requirement for a
+,
full-time structural engineer inspector per
o �,
Caldwell letter dated 7/19/84.
$19,200.00
(n
Item #7 -Decrease $589,200.00 to $570,000.00
waste
J
TOTALS
$1.9�2
,IlQ_00____...._--_--
0-
Q m r_.1
CD
___--- _-�__--___--_
NET CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE
$1 -r
-
JUSTIFICATION:
Indian River County has determined that recent amendments to
the related law has
removed the water tank from the threshold category and the need for a full-time
structural engineer inspector is unnecessary.
The amount of the Contract will be (Decreased) (%n`EI(MN& By The Sum Of: Nineteen Thousand Two Hundred
and 00/100---------------------------------------- -Dollars($-19,200.00 )
The Contract Total Including this and previous Change Orders Will Be: Seven Hundred twenty-eight thou-
sand. five hundred and 00/100--------------------- `Dollars($ 728,500.00
The Contract Period Provided for Completion Will Be (IIC(DldE7f (Unchanged): _'4FO Cal PnAar Days
This document *11 become a supplement to the contract and all provisions will apply hereto.
Requested ' C- August 15, 1984
Recommended
Accepted ^ �V• Wed v
(Owner)
(Owner's Architect/Engineer)
tractor)
Approved By FmHA
(Name and Title)
(Date)
July 24, 1984
(Date)
Julv 30, 1984
(D ate)
(Date)
This Information will be used as record of any Number copies required: 4 No further monies or other benefits may be paid out under this
changes to the original construction contract. program unless this report is completed and filed as required by
Time to complete: 30 min. existing law and regulations (7 C.F.R. Part 1924).
*U.S.GPO:1981-0-584-0091157n �� FmNA d7d_7 (R.- r t i on%
AUG 15 1984
Position 6 - • • ""�
13
BooK 58 PAGE 13
F
AUG 15 1984
BOOK 58 F,* 14
'DISCUSSION RE CONFISCATED PROPERTY ON SOUTH BEACH
OMB Director Barton informed the Board that when it was
learned that the piece of property on South Beach under
confiscation for a drug raid, generally referred to as the
Carta house, was to be auctioned off, inquiries were made
through our Congressmen's offices as to the possibility of
obtaining this property on behalf of the county for use for
public purposes since in the South Beach area we have almost
nothing in the way of beach access. He wished to know if
the Board would like staff to continue to pursue whether
this property can be transferred to the county. The property
consists of approximately seven acres with 300' of beach
frontage and includes an 11,000 sq. ft. house. Mr. Barton
believed it would make a good art gallery or something of
that type. There are outstanding liens against it of
approximately $600,000.
Chairman Scurlock noted that the Board has no backup
information on this item. He felt that staff needed to put
something together showing a suggested use and probable
amount of dollars involved. What has been presented today
is too nebulous.
Ob1B Director Barton explained that the reason this was
brought to the Board now is that the Bureau of Lands has
determined that the highest and best use of the property is
residential, but they were not aware of the fact that this,
is in a void area of what we are trying to do on our
beaches. Their determination can be reversed by the Park
Service, but there are some technical things that have to be
done between now and the November auction date.
Commissioner Lyons asked if we did receive this
property, would we be able at a later date to trade that
land for some other place rather than that particular
location on the beach.
14
M
OMB Director Barton felt that would be most unlikely
because the granting deed would have the clause that it is
to be used for specific public purposes only. He noted the
County also would have the option of bidding at the auction.
Commissioner Wodtke stated that he would like this
matter to come back on the next agenda with a map and more
complete information, including a proposal on how the
property would be used, impact on the neighborhood, etc.
Administrator Wright confirmed that staff will do so.
jDISCUSSION RE REPLACEMENT OF RADIO REPEATER
H. T. "Sonny" Dean, Director of General Services,
informed the Board that at present we operate a 100 watt RCA
repeater at the tower at Hobart Park for the Public Works
Department,the Landfill, Animal Control, etc. We have had
continual problems with this repeater, requiring several
service calls, and in the last two weeks we have been on the
air only about four hours altogether. Mr. Dean reported
that they no longer build this RCA and parts are very
difficult to come by. To replace the repeater would cost,
on GSA contract, approximately $3,500. The new repeater
would be compatible with what we have now and anything we do
in the future. It was his recommendation that we replace
this unit at this time.
Commissioner Lyons inquired about delivery, and Mr..
Dean stated that it would be several weeks; they do not have
a firm date. The money for the repeater would be prorated
through the departments and absorbed. Some discussion
ensued regarding shipping costs, etc.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, to replace
the repeater as recommended at a cost not to
exceed $4,000.
15
AUG 15 1984 BooK 58 FADE 1
r AU G15 1994
BOOK 58 PAGE 1
Commissioner Wodtke wished to know how old the RCA
repeater was, and Administrator Wright stated that it is the
oldest one we have, probably ten years or more.
Discussion ensued in regard to bidding on this item and
service, and Mr. Dean noted that we can buy on an emergency
type requisition through GSA, and it will be handled under
our service contract. Administrator Wright confirmed that
it will be included in the annual maintenance contract that
we bid.
Mr. Dean further explained that we can't buy base units
on state contract but the dealers give us a GSA price.
Steve Wells, Director of Emergency Management,
concurred that the repeater they are discussing would do the
job.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously. (4-0)
COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST TO AMEND LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RE NODE BOUNDARIES
The hour of 9:15 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
Commissioner Lyons believed we should hear from those
present today; there has been a counter proposal made of
some interest, however, and he felt before we make a final
decision on a matter of this importance all Board members
should be present.
Chairman Scurlock agreed. He believed it is up to the
Commission whether to act on this today or delay it to the
next meeting, but commented that he did know that Commis-
sioner Bird, who is in Tallahassee on County business, has
some specific comments on these amendments. The Chairman
17
AUG 15 1984 Bou 58 m -H 17
NOTICE— PUBLIC HEARING
TO CONSIDER RECOMMENDING THE
ADOPTION OF A COUNTY ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE
ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Notice of hearing to consider the adoption of
a County Ordinance amending the text of the
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan
providing for establishing core area boundaries
and outer limit boundaries for each of the com-
y
mercial, commercial/industrial, industrial, tourl-
st/commercial, and hospital/commercial nodes
as designated on the Land Use Map and de-
scribed in the text of the Land Use Element of
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
the Comprehensive Plan by:
A. Adding a paragraph 9 to page 34 of
the Comprehensive Pian as follows:'
9) Core area boundaries and
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
outer limit boundaries will be es-
_
tablished for each node. The
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
Core area will include at least 25
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
percent but not more than 100
percent of the acreage of the
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
node. Land within the care area
boundary will, considered
within the node.e. Outer limit '
boundaries will include at least
a ��L2
125 percent but not more than
_
200 percent of the acreage of the
node. Land outside of the outer
in the matter of f�
limit of the node will be consid-
ered outside of the node. Land
located outside of the erre area
but within the outer llm# bound-
ary may be considered in the _ -
node if there is unallocated-acre-
nallocated acre -age
ageavailable in the node and the
in the Court, was pub-
Parcel is situated now other
commercial or industrial uses in.
the node. Procedures outlining.
this process should be approved -
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
by the Planning and Zoning
Commision and_- the Board of
/County
d %
Commissioners.'
2. Adding a paragraph 10 to 34 of
page
the Comprehensive Plan as follows:
10. Core area boundaries and
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach ress-Journal is a newspaper published at
outer limit boundaries for each
node will be reviewed for recom-
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
mendation by the Planning and
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
Zoning Commission after a pub-
us
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
entered
lic hearing and will be adopted
by the Board of County Commis-
%nere
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
after a •public hearing.
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
Notice of these public hearings
or corporation an discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of security this
P Y P P 9
shall be by published notice only.
Once adopted, no rezoning shall
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
be granted nor development i
order Issued for commercial or
industrial development of land
Sworn to and subscribed bef re me is day of A.D. 19
located outside of the outer emit
`boundary,
except as maybe pro-
vided elsewhere by the Compre- t
henslve Plan.
(Bu es anager)
A, public hearing at which parties in interest
.. and citizens shall have an opportunity to be i
%4
heard, will be held by the Board of County Com-
' y'
missioners of Indian River County Florida, in the
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian R• County, Florida)
County Commission Chambers of the County!
(SEAL)
Administration Building, located at 1940 25th
street, Vero
Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, Aug-
ust 15, 1984, at 9:15 a.m.
If any person decides to appeal any decision
made on the above matter, he/she will need a,'
record of the proceedings, and for such pur-
poses, he/she may need to ensure that a verba-
tim record of the proceedings is made, which in-
cludes testimony and evidence upon which the
appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
B :-s-Don C. Scurlock Jr.
Chairman
July 28, Aug. 7, 1984.
Commissioner Lyons believed we should hear from those
present today; there has been a counter proposal made of
some interest, however, and he felt before we make a final
decision on a matter of this importance all Board members
should be present.
Chairman Scurlock agreed. He believed it is up to the
Commission whether to act on this today or delay it to the
next meeting, but commented that he did know that Commis-
sioner Bird, who is in Tallahassee on County business, has
some specific comments on these amendments. The Chairman
17
AUG 15 1984 Bou 58 m -H 17
AUG 15 1994 BOOK 58 F,�cE 1�
did feel that we need to go ahead with the public hearing in
any event.
Chief Planner Richard Shearer made the staff presenta-
tion, explaining how staff arrived at the proposed amend-
ments, and stressing that staff is not asking the Board to
set the outer boundaries of any of the nodes at this time,
but just to set the procedure to do so.
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: July 30, 1984 FILE:
of the Board of
_ County Commissioners COUNTY -INITIATED RE -
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT:
Robert M. Keati g, VCP
Planning & Development Director
QUEST TO AMEND THE TEXT
OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT
OF THE COMP. PLAN PRO-
VIDING FOR NODE BOUNDA-
RIES
FROM -Richard Shearer, AICP REFERENCESP-o.Int. CPA/Nodes
Chief, Long -Range Planning CHIEF
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of August 15, 1984.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Indian River County is initiating a request to amend the text
of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan providing for
establishing core area boundaries and outer limit boundaries
for each of the commercial, commercial/industrial, industrial,
tourist/commercial, and hospital/commercial nodes as designated
on the Land Use Map and described in the text of the Land Use
Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
During the three joint workshops between the Board of County
Commissioners and the Planning and Zoning Commission concerning
the County's commercial nodes, it was decided to establish core
area boundaries and outer limit boundaries for each of the
nodes to assist in determining whether or not a particular
property is in a node.
On July 12, 1984, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
5 -to -0 to recommend approval of this request.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In order to provide for establishing these boundaries, the
following amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is proposed:
1. Adding a paragraph 9 to page 34 of the Comprehensive Plan
as follows:
18
� � r
9) Core area boundaries and outer limit boundaries will
be established for each node. The core area will
include at least 25 percent but not more than 100
percent of the acreage of the node. Land within the
core area boundary will be considered within the node.
Outer limit boundaries will include at least 125
percent but not more than 200 percent of the acreage
of the node. Land outside of the outer limit of the
node will be considered outside of the node. Land
located outside of the core area but within the outer
limit boundary may be considered in the node if there
is unallocated acreage available in the node and the
parcel is situated near other commercial or industrial
uses in the node. Procedures outlining this process
should be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commis-
sion and the Board of County Commissioners.
2. Adding a paragraph 10 to page 34 of the Comprehensive Plan
as follows
10) Core area boundaries and outer limit boundaries for
each node will be reviewed for recommendation by the
Planning and Zoning Commission after a public hearing
and will be adopted by the Board of County Commis-
sioners after a public hearing. Notice of these
public hearings shall be by published notice only.
Once adopted, no rezoning shall be granted nor
development order issued for commercial or industrial
development of land located outside of the outer
limit boundary, except as may be provided elsewhere
by the Comprehensive Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning
Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners adopt the above proposed amendment to the
text of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be
heard.
Nancy Offutt, speaking as legislative liaison for the
Board of Realtors, commended the County for initiating the
workshop sessions, but continued that she is here to suggest
that the proposed remedy conflicts with the reality of the
problem and further compounds it. She emphasized that the
Board of Realtor's interest lies in making the nodal concept
workable, and they feel the real need is the ability to work
within the Plan and rely on the integrity of its provisions.
Mrs. Offutt stated that the Realtors feel the first provi-
sion must be more definitive of nodal boundaries so the
property owner knows the use of his property. She then
spoke against the first come, first served premise, noting
19
AUG 15 1984 BOOK 58 Fmu 19
r "I
AUG 15 1994 BOOK 5$;( 7Q
that Commissioner Wodtke in previous meetings has recognized
the plight of the taxpayer who pays commercial taxes on land
he may not be able to use as commercial. She continued to
review the Minutes of the workshop and quoted statements
made by Chief Planner Shearer which indicated that the
purpose of the amendments was to reduce some of the existing
flexibility; reduce reliance on the first come, first served
concept; define the core area; and set some outer limits
which would be an outer ultimate boundary. She felt the
Board of Realtors was in agreement with Mr. Shearer up to
this point, but the point was raised that the more flexi-
bility incorporated in the nodal boundaries, the more
reliance there would be on the first come, first served
concept. Mrs. Offutt next raised the question of dealing
with the problem of in -fill and believed that the first
come, first served concept almost implies contract zoning.
She did not feel this would work and noted that where
flexibility normally would be regarded as a benefit, it
seems to be causing only confusion.
Attorney Joe Collins next came before the Board
speaking for the Board of Realtors. He complimented Chief
Planner Richard Shearer for being most cooperative.
Attorney Collins informed the Commission that the Board of
Realtors has taken a position because they felt the need for
an alternative to the concept presented by staff today. The
position they have established is set out in the following
letter from Arthur Perruzzi, President of the Board of
Realtors:
20
August 13, 1984
VERO BEACH - INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF REALTORS®
2182 Ponce De Leon Circle
Post Office Drawer G
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Phone (305) 567-3510
The Honorable Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman
and Board of County Commissioners
1840 - 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Chairman Scurlock and Commissioners:
On Wednesday, August 15 you will hear testimony from the public regarding the
county -initiated request to amend the text of the Land Use Element of the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan providing for node boundaries.
As participants in the several workshops which addressed the "nodal dilemma"
we appreciate the difficulty in reaching a balance between certainty and
flexibility. Given the same research information provided by the county staff,
with the experiences of day-to-day situations, we have reached a conclusion
somewhat different than that proposed by the staff.
Enclosed for your review is the stated position of the Vero Beach -Indian River
County Board of REALTORS. We respectfully request that you accept these
recommendations in the same regard as we offer them -- to maintain the integrity
of the Land Use Plan as it was adopted and to make the nodal concept more
workable.
Sin rely
Arthur A:
President
enc.
DISTR[BUTION LIST
Com nissio Iers [.�---
Administrator
Attorney
Personnel
Pul_,lic Works
Community Dev.
Utilities
Finance
Other
REALTOR® — is a registered mark which Identifies a professional in real
estate who subscribes to a strict code of Ethics as a member of the
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS.
21
AUG 15 1984 aooK 58 U 21
AUG 15 194
BOQ1( 58 F�1.) �
Position of the Vero Beach -Indian River County Board of REALTORS
re: County initiated request to amend land use element of the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan providing for node boundaries.
1. OBJECTIVE. The objective of nodal definition should be to
create stability and certainty of overall land use, plus some
flexibility based on demand for use.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS. To accomplish the objective the Vero
Beach -Indian River County Board of REALTORS recommends the
following:
(a) Recognize each node with the acreage as currently desig-
nated in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
(b) Define and rezone each node and the total acreage in
conformity with zoning allowed within the node.
(c) Create through the rezoning and definition of the node
size a permanency of land use that can be relied upon.
(d) No property within the defined node shall have its
zoning allocation transferred to lands outside the
established node.
(e) In recognition of the need for some flexibility in the
area surrounding the node, through the amendment process to
the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance, other
properties may have their uses rezoned. In no event should
those rezonings reduce the allocation within the original
node. The reasons that a reduction or re -allocation should
not occur are:
(1) Good planning should not be based on first come,
first served premise.
(2) The public has a right to a degree of reliance upon
the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and property uses should -not
be restricted through the flow of allocation. The concept of
"infill" is contra to private property rights.
(3) A great deal of flexibility, the result of which
depends upon administrative discretion, will result in
government induced speculation, development away from the
core area (cheaper prices) and discrimination among the prop-
erty owners. -
(f) The response to the need for flexibility changes to the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan should be allowed at least
quarterly.
(g) The representations made to land owners on adoption of
the Comprehensive Land Use Plan should be followed through in
• regards to the existing node areas since many people, rightly
or wrongly, have made decisions based upon the location of
the nodes and provisions within the Comprehensive Land Use
Plan.
3. SUMMARY. The Board of REALTORS believes that lands within
Indian River County should be developed in an orderly fashion in
accordance with zoning and the Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
Owners of property and purchasers of property have the right to a
certain degree of reliance upon the County Zoning Ordinance and
Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The less discretion administrative
personnel are afforded the more reliance property owners and
taxpayers within the County receive.
We hope you will consider the above recommendations in your
deliberations regarding the nodal structure.
22
_I
M M
Attorney Collins emphasized that, first of all,
realtors need to be able to represent to buyers and sellers
of property how that property can be used. The Compre-
hensive Plan did make it clearer for the realtors to say
whether property is or is not in conformance, but the nodal
areas remain a gray area, and from a liability standpoint,
the realtors have found it frustrating and difficult to deal
with the issue with any degree of reliance. He felt if the
Commission accepts the Planning Department's recommendation,
they are increasingly going to be put in the position of
making judgment calls of one property against another,
especially as the node begins to fill up.
Attorney Collins explained that basically the realtors
are saying let's accept the Plan as adopted, take the nodes
as they exist, and go ahead and rezone to the uses as
established by the Plan. He pointed out that, rightly or
wrongly, many transactions have taken place since the
adoption of the Comprehensive Plan where people have made
business decisions feeling that they were or were not in the
nodes, and by rezoning the properties now in the nodes, the
Board will dlarify that position for everybody. Attorney
Collins continued that the Board of Realtors feels planning
and zoning should not be based on a first come, first served
issue, but that it should be based on an overall view of the
situation, after which the Board should adopt policies and
then let growth occur according to those policies rather
than being in the position of reacting to events as they
arise.
Attorney Collins next addressed the issue of the
in -fill question and visualized that in a situation where
the inner core of 25% is filled up and projects have been
approved near the outer boundary, there would be tremendous
pressure on the Board to rezone all the land in between by
transferring allocations from somebody else.
23
AUG 15 1984
If the Board
BOOK 58 Fp;F �3
AUG 15 1994
BOOK 58 FnUF 2
totally rezones the node now and identifies what they want
to do with it, they will eliminate this problem. Attorney
Collins stressed that the realtors recognize that the
Commission cannot adopt a hard fast policy that cannot
change, and they have no opposition, once the node is
rezoned, if the Commission at some future time decides to
increase the node and include certain other areas. He
suggested that the Comprehensive Plan be amended to allow
changes at least on a quarterly basis to address issues that
are unforeseen now. Attorney Collins continued to emphasize
that people have relied on the nodes whether they should or
not, and he believed there is some obligation for the Com-
mission to follow through and rezone the nodes in compliance
with the Comprehensive Plan.
Commissioner Lyons wished to commend the Board of
Realtors for taking a positive approach to this problem.
Chairman Scurlock commented that one of his concerns
was that we need to have the nodes of sufficient size so
there is enough competition within the marketplace that we
don't stagnate. If you refine the boundaries too much, he
noted that everybody thinks their property is gold and
prices rise accordingly.
Attorney Collins stated that he certainly favored
having the nodes large enough so there is competition. He
stressed that the Board of Realtors is not in any way
advocating a vesting to a limited number of people; they
just want to define the issue and make it clear so there is
a reliance.
Commissioner Wodtke noted that if we are going to try
zoning to the Plan, we must realize it is a 20 year plan,
and he did not feel we can limit the node to just what we
need today; we do need some flexibility. He agreed that
what the realtor's have proposed would be a logical way to
proceed, but noted that the issue still is whether it is a
24
C1
proper utilization of the land and actually more a zoning
decision than a Comprehensive Plan decision.
Chairman Scurlock noted that one other concern is the
mix between commercial and industrial which he felt should
be better defined.
In further discussion it was generally agreed there
would be some hard decisions to be faced. Commissioner
Lyons pointed out that this county is growing very rapidly
and he did not feel we can avoid hard decisions one way or
the other. We cannot avoid requests for change whichever
way we go, but he agreed that we might get more stability
from the proposal made by the Board of Realtors.
Attorney Michael O'Haire noted that he has a number of
clients who will be affected and he has spoken before on the
need to reduce the flexibility. Mr. O'Haire did not feel
that either the recommendation of staff or of the realtors,
which he felt had a lot of merit, will solve the problem.
He believed that what is really needed is concentric rings
of zoning which will phase out to different zonings. Right
now there are given uses on the edge of the nodes that will
not be compatible, and what he would recommend is the
phasing of uses from more intense to less intense.
Attorney Steve Henderson informed the Board that his
clients neither strongly support nor oppose the idea of
drawing limits. They would basically support what the Board
of Realtors has proposed, but would also urge that the
Commission more clearly define the separation of industrial
and commercial within the commercial/industrial nodes,
perhaps with a dual node approach or perhaps by just simply
identifying a quadrant of the node for industrial. He
emphasized that confusion arises from people who have had
certain zoning for years and assumed they could use the
property for that purpose, but then find they may not be
25
AUG 15 1984 BOOK U8 Pal
AUG. 15
1984
BOOK
,F 26
within
the confines of the node and their zoning
gives
them
no edge.
Attorney Henderson informed the Board that in both
instances, the people he represents are ready to develop and
they have been denied - in one case because they are outside
what is considered the outer boundaries of the node, and in
the other case, because of in -fill allotted to owners who
have not requested it or who have first come and been first
served. Some owners are warehousing their property, and
Attorney Henderson felt there is something unfair here which
he believed can be solved if the Commission makes these
determinations concurrent with development within a certain
period of time. If the Board does adopt the proposal to set
geographic boundaries, he questioned whether there is really
a need for node acreage measurements. He reiterated that
his clients neither support nor oppose the establishment of
the boundary system, but believe these other factors need
consideration in order to avoid further confusion.
Tom Culler, chairman of the Construction Industry Man-
agement Council, reported that the Council has endorsed the
Board of Realtors' position. As far as the major commercial
nodes are concerned, he noted that the major part of that
has been settled by the Comprehensive Plan; the strip zoning
on the smaller collector roads has been removed and loca-
tions of the nodes identified. By setting the flexible core
boundary at 100% of the node, he felt the Board, in a sense,
already would have accomplished rezoning as onyone outside
that boundary would have to go through the whole process to
determine whether they will be allocated the zoning or not,
which is very little different than being outside an area
currently zoned commercial. If a maximum acreage size is
set for the node, Mr. Culler noted that once the nodes are
full, every commercial project will have to go through.a
rezoning process, and he did not feel that was the original
intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
W 26 M
Jack Sherman of the Property Appraiser's office
informed those present that his specific duties include
reappraising all the commercial and industrial lands every
year, and he is faced with a very large problem. Mr.
Sherman did not believe anyone can find an answer that will.
eliminate change in the future, but he believed the present
amount of uncertainty we have as to what use is going to be
allowed is unwise; therefore, he felt the.position the
realtors have taken makes sense. He noted that there used
to be a speculative real estate market for this property,
but those sales have totally disappeared. Mr. Sherman
believed if there were more certainty, you would reestablish
that. He reported that the Property Appraiser's office
takes the position that if there is disagreement between the
Comprehensive Plan and the existing zoning, in fairness to
the taxpayer, they feel it necessary to assume that
whichever is the most restrictive is the only use they
should contemplate when assessing. With more definite
zoning, Mr. Sherman believed the county would see the tax
base grow some.
Commissioner Wodtke questioned how they would assess
land within a node, and Mr. Sherman explained that it
depends on how close land is to the node; as it gets distant
from the center, then it gets uncertain. They have taken a
non-aggressive policy and a lot of assessments have gone
down because of this. They don't see many sales for such
lands and can't get the input they need.
Cliff Norris, Realtor, appeared before the Board and
stated that he was making his own comments and not necessar-
ily those of the Board of Realtors. In regard to the
problem of assigning lines to the interior core, he noted
that it has been his experience that development usually
takes place along major road lines. He, therefore felt the
interior core should be shaped and developed accordingly.
27
BOOK 5 8 Fku,F. 27r
AUG 15 1984
BOOK 58 Fm,F
No one further wished to be heard, and the Chairman
asked Attorney Paull if we can close the hearing or just
continue it.
Attorney Paull stated that the Board could close the
public hearing and table further consideration on the
matter, and on the date it is rescheduled, reopen the public
hearing.
Chief Planner Shearer noted that in the case it would
be necessary to readvertise, and Attorney Paull felt it
should be readvertised in any event.
Commissioner Wodtke raised the question of whether we
would send this back to the Planning & Zoning Commission,
and debate followed on that point.
Attorney Paull noted that the Board has a recommenda-
tion from the Planning & Zoning Commission. The process to
amend the Comprehensive Plan does not really even require
they recommend changes; it requires the Board to make that
decision. He felt this can come back to this Board for
further discussion and then be adopted that time.
Commissioner Wodtke noted that the Board of Realtors'
position is significantly different from staff's recommenda-
tion and what was advertised. He realized we can continue
this, but felt we should readvertise so that public can give
their reactions.
Chairman Scurlock emphasized that he would like to see
some lines established and then readdress it from time to
time, and he would like to address the commercial/
industrial question also. He felt we should get this in
concrete and then go with it.
Chief Planner Shearer noted that staff has been very
frustrated with this situation also and would like to get it
settled, but if the Board wishes to alter significantly what
staff and the Planning Department has recommended, he felt
they should start over.
M
M
Commissioner Wodtke suggested that we close this
hearing and then reschedule another hearing; let the staff
go back through the process with Planning & Zoning and
readvertise. He believed that is the proper way to go back
through it, but did not feel his decision will change any.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
(4-0) closed the public hearing.
Administrator Wright did not anticipate staff doing
that much more work, and felt the Board is just delaying the
decision. Some discussion ensued re setting a hearing
date, possibly September 12th, as it was felt this must be
cleared up quickly.
Commissioner Wodtke believed that staff has indicated
they want to review it and the Planning & Zoning Commission
needs to review it before September 12th; therefore, he felt
possibly there could be a joint meeting.
Discussion continued regarding making a policy decision
as to rigid or flexible boundaries, and Chairman Scurlock
felt the Board is saying we want concrete boundaries.
Administrator Wright noted that once the Board says
absolutely rigid boundaries, then staff can do the work, but
he did not want to see them move ahead with that until the
Board makes the decision.
Commissioner Lyons did not feel the proposal of the
Board of Realtors is too different from the trend of the
thoughts developed through the workshops. He stated that he
would like to see us set the boundaries on a solid basis,
but felt we should take another look at the boundaries to be
sure they are big enough for 20 years, as best as we can
guess. He agreed the tendency is to have more commercial
29
AUG 15 1984
BOOK 5 8 PAGt 129
I
_I
AUG 15 1984 BOOK'S f��G�130
established along the highest traveled roads and felt we
also should take a look at the shapes of the nodes.
Chief Planner Shearer noted that it seems what the
Board wants is a site-specific Land Use Plan getting away
from the node, but the Administrator felt that what they
want is rigid nodes where we would in -fill now rather than
later.
Discussion continued re the date of September 12th, and
the Administrator did not feel there is that much to be
done; when the Board makes the decision about concrete
boundaries, then staff will bring them back to the Board one
at a time.
Chief Planner Shearer informed the Board that Mrs.
Offutt has a suggestion in regard to just deleting a few
words from staff's recommendations,i.e., - where it says
core area boundaries and outer limit boundaries will be
established, strike out "and outer limit boundaries," and
then state that "The core area will include 1000 of the
acreage of the node" rather than "at least 25% but not more
than." He continued to review how the wording in the
proposed amendments could be changed deleting reference to
outer limit boundaries.
Commissioner Wodtke commented that actually we do not
need to say "core boundary," and Administrator Wright stated
that staff will develop the language and bring it back to
the Board.
It was agreed to advertise another hearing for 9:45
A.M. on September 12th, and then staff will come back with
actual boundaries at a later date.
Chairman Scurlock called for a short recess. He
reopened the meeting in ten minutes with the same members
present, except Commissioner Bowman who did not return.
30
COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST TO AMEND COMPREHENSIVE PLA -
f.ESTABLISHING COMMERCIAL NODE AT 27TH AVE. & OSLO
The hour of 9:30 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Reach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a /
in the matter ofWi��l�Jl/
in the / G Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matterat the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscri
(SEAL)
D. 19 _
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian R
vvw�Iy, rwuual
NOTICE = PUBLIC HEARINQ LI
-TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A COUNTY i,
A
ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN ' l `•"'
Notice of hearing Initiated. by Indian River
County to consider, the following proposal to
amend the Land Use Element of the Comprehen-
sive Planby desigHating a'f fty (50) acre com-
mercial node at.the intersection at Oslo Road,
and 27th Avenue.
A public hearing at which parties in Intereat'
and citizens shalt have an opportunity, to be
heard, will be held by. the Board of County Com-'
missioners of Indian River County, Florida, in the
County Commission Chambers- of the County
Administration Building, located at 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, Aug=:
ust 15, 1984, at 9:30 a.m.
If any person decides to appeal any decision',
made on the above matter, he/she will need a
record of the proceedings, and for such pur-
poses, he/she may need to ensure that a verba
tim record of the proceedings is made, which in-.
cludes testimony and evidence upon: which the
appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By: -.-Don C. Scurlock Jr.
Chairman
July 28, Aug. 7, 1984.
Chief Planner Shearer made the staff presentation, as
follows:
31
AUG 15 1984 BOOK 58 FAGS 63 .
Boos 5 8 6�`U 'E '3
f t,
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: July 30, 1984 FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT:
l� 'Z-A�� -
Robert M. Kea i, AVP
Planning & Development Director
COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST
TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN BY ESTABLISHING A
COMMERCIAL NODE AT 27TH
AVENUE AND OSLO ROAD
FROM: Richard Shearer, AICP REFERENCES: Co.Int.CPA/27th
Chief, Long -Range Planning DIS:CHIEF
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of August 15, 1984.
DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS:
The County is initiating a request to amend the Comprehensive
Plan by designating a fifty (50) acre commercial node at the
intersection of 27th Avenue and Oslo Road. On May 2, 1984, the
Board of County Commissioners designated a seven acre neighbor-
hood commercial node at the northwest corner of the inter-
section and instructed the Planning Department to prepare a
proposal to amend the Comprehensive Plan by designating a
general commercial node at the intersection.
In 1982, during the public hearings for the Comprehensive Plan,
the Board of County Commissioners designated a neighborhood
node at the southwest corner of Oslo Road and 27th Avenue for a
4.6 acre parcel of land.
On June 14, 1984, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
4 -to -0 to recommend approval of this request.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
In analyzing this request, staff took into consideration the
facts that two neighborhood nodes had been established at the
intersection (totalling 11.6 acres) and that there were a
number of existing commercial uses in this area which should be
included in the node.
Existing Land Use Pattern:
Presently, the intersection of 27th Avenue and Oslo Road
contains a convenience store on the northeast corner (on a 1.12
acre parcel), a mobile home park on the southeast corner,
vacant land on the southwest corner, and three single-family
residences on the northwest corner. North of these residences,
extending north almost to the South Relief Canal, the area has
developed primarily in commercial uses under the current C-1,
Commercial District, zoning of this area. These existing
commercial uses and infill property occupy approximately 18
acres. Most of the other land around the intersection is
undeveloped although there is scattered residential development
further south on 27th Avenue and scattered commercial uses on
Oslo Road to the west.
32
Future Land Use Pattern:
The Comprehensive Plan designates the land on the east side of
27th Avenue as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6
units/acre), and the land on the west side of 27th Avenue as
LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1 (up to 3 units/acre). One
thousand feet west of 27th Avenue on the north side of Oslo
Road is the eastern boundary of the west part of the Oslo Road
MXD, Mixed -Use District (up to 3 units/acre).
At the present time in the Oslo Road/27th Avenue area, there
are approximately 30.72 acres of land in commercial uses,
designated as neighborhood nodes, or necessary for infill
commercial to connect the existing and committed properties.
This acreage is broken down as:
1) Existing Commercial, Northeast corner - 1.12 acres;
2) Neighborhood node, Southwest corner - 4.6 acres;
3) Neighborhood node, Northwest corner - 7 acres;
4) Existing Commercial and infill property North of
Northwest corner - 18 acres.
Based on the existing and committed commercial development and
the need to provide for some future commercial development
in this area, a commercial node of 50 acres should be provided
at the 27th Avenue and Oslo Road intersection.
Transportation System:
Oslo Road is designated as an arterial street on the County's
Thoroughfare Plan. Emerson (27th) Avenue is currently des-
ignated as a primary collector street but is proposed to be
redesignated as an arterial street. The County's policy has
been to locate commercial nodes at major intersections. Based
on this policy, the intersection of Oslo Road and 27th Avenue
is a logical place for a commercial node.
TTti_1_ities:
County water and wastewater facilities are not available for
this area. However, County water facilities are scheduled to
be available in August.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning
Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that a 50 acre
commercial node be established at the intersection of Oslo Road
and 27th Avenue.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be
heard.
Elizabeth Mason, owner of the property on the southwest
corner of the intersection of Oslo Road and 27th Avenue, in-
formed the Board that she was totally in favor of the
proposed amendment which would establish 'a commercial node
at that intersection as she felt that she has no use of her
property as it now exists.
33
AUG 15 1984 BOOK 5 8 FA„F 33
AUG 15 1984 Boo
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, Commissioner Bowman
not having returned to the meeting and
Commissioner Bird being absent, the Board
unanimously (3-0) adopted Ordinance 84-52
amending the Comprehensive Plan by desig-
nating a 50 acre commercial node at the
intersection of Oslo Road and 27th Avenue.
34
r
ORDINANCE NO. 84-52
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
amend the Comprehensive Plan by redesignating the hereinafter
described property and pursuant thereto held a public hearing
in relation thereto, at which parties in interest and citizens
were heard; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida, that the Land Use Element of the
Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County, Florida, and the
accompanying Land Use Map, be amended as follows:
1. That the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan
be amended by designating a 50 acre commercial node
at the intersection of Oslo Road and 27th Avenue.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and
described in said Land Use Element.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida on this 15thday of August
1984.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY: ' ./ G 4d2'�
DON C. SCURL CK, JR.
Chairman
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of
Florida this 20th day of August , 1984.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Dep�a,Aent.of State
received on this 23rd day of August , 1984, at��;M./P.M. and
filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SJ FPFTCIENCY.
County Attorney
35
AUG 15 1984
BOOK 58 FACE 35
AUG 15 1994
BOOK 58 FA,E
The several bills and accounts against the County
having been audited were examined and found to be correct
were approved and warrants issued in settlement of same as
follows: Treasury Fund Nos. 11637 - 11781 inclusive. Such
bills and accounts being on file in the Office of the Clerk
of the Circuit Court, the warrants so issued from the
respective bonds being listed in the Supplemental Minute
Book as provided by the rules of the Legislative Auditor,
reference to such record and list so recorded being made a
part of these Minutes.
There being no further business, on Motion made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 10:45 o'clock
A.M.
Attest:
Clerk
36
wu�Chairman